Another 737 down

[Toad]

Busher: horsepower!

It also developed the 8E and 8F with electrical systems and 85- and 90-hp Continentals, respectively.    https://www.aopa.org/go-fly/aircraft-and-ownership/aircraft-fact-sheets/luscombe-8

There was a 8F at the field where my PT was restored; looked at it some and the price was right but man...that's another small cockpit. I passed. Neat airplane though.

[Busher]

I have some time in a Fairchild 24 too. The guy that restored my PT-19 had one of those, along with a Ranger powered Great Lakes. We went flying in the 24. A very nice airplane. Even has roll up/down side windows like a car. Pretty easy to land.

My problem with a Stearman is the view just sucks. It's all wings, struts and wires. In a PT-19 or a PT-22 it's like being in a convertible with the top down. The "the long, delirious, burning blue" and "the wind-swept heights" are right there . Doing rolls and lazy 8s and loops with your vision unencumbered is just a superfine experience.

I love open cockpit and the more open the better.

I am happy for you that the thrill is still there. Since I have no connect to GA anymore, does the -19 fly "experimental" now or do you have to maintain a CoA?
In Canada where I worked and retired, GA is dying a slow death primarily due fuel costs. We buy by the liter but converting to the US Gallon, the price ranges from $7 to $8/gal.
Until 1995, my Dad (also a retired airline pilot) shared and enjoyed a PA30 that now resides in New Jersey. I couldn't afford it today anyway.

[Toad]

Man, I dunno.  I always found the -22 to be hideous.   Liked the -26 so much more.

WHAT? Hideous?? Sacrilege! The PT-22 is svelte and sexy. Even the flying wires are coolness. I still like the looks of that aircraft.

My dad had a PT-26 same time my brother and I had PT-19s. He lived in NE, so the canopy seriously extended his flying season. Nonetheless, I did not enjoy flying his as much. Too much canopy framing hindering my view. It buffeted you worse than the PT-19 when you slid back the canopy too. It was hot in the summer when closed. Usually just cracked it back the first notch to let a little air in and limit the buffeting.   Nah....-19s 4EVAR!

[Busher]

Busher: horsepower!

There was a 8F at the field where my PT was restored; looked at it some and the price was right but man...that's another small cockpit. I passed. Neat airplane though.

Wow, you're testing an old man's memory. Continental 85hp comes to mind.

[Toad]

I am happy for you that the thrill is still there. Since I have no connect to GA anymore, does the -19 fly "experimental" now or do you have to maintain a CoA?
In Canada where I worked and retired, GA is dying a slow death primarily due fuel costs. We buy by the liter but converting to the US Gallon, the price ranges from $7 to $8/gal.
Until 1995, my Dad (also a retired airline pilot) shared and enjoyed a PA30 that now resides in New Jersey. I couldn't afford it today anyway.

Busher, I lost my medical in 2002. All I have now is memories. Well...and a nice six axis Level D simulator to play with.

The PT-19 is a Fairchild M62A to the FAA so it's not "experimental". Normal regs apply for inspection and maintenance. Just have to do an annual. It's a 1930s hardware store airplane; we used to joke that if you had a, screwdriver, pliers, a 1/2 " and 7/16" wrench you had almost a full tool set. Easy to work on. I pulled all the panels for the annual and helped out as "go-for' and I put all the panels back on. My annuals weren't that expensive. Just not all that much to check LOL!

It's about a 9.5 gallon/hour aircraft so back then I was ~$40-50 an hour on fuel and I just doubled that for maintenance reserve. The Ranger was designed to use oil as part of the cooling of the inline inverted 6, so it used about .8 quart per hour as well. They had a really amazing air inlet in the cowl that ran through baffles and exited between each cylinder with almost the same pressure from front to rear.

My Dad's PT-26 was in Canadian colors. Two old Canadian farmers that had trained in -26s decided to restore a pair of them and relive their youth. They did good jobs on both. They lost their tickets about a year after they finished and a ex-Marine F9 pilot imported one. He lost his vision/medical a year later, so we bought the -26. My Dad flew it about 10 years. it was a good airplane. Ended up getting imported back into Canada when Dad could no longer fly in his late 80s.

[perdue3]

On the Silvaire,

Once Luscombe AC folded, they were bought by Temco. Temco produced 8F's with flaps along with the Globe Swift. So, apart from an O-200, some 8F's had flaps and were built by Temco. My second flight instructor has won numerous awards with his Swift and Luscombe 8E.

[guncrasher]

man reading this thread I think we could write a song.
memories of the things we did before...

bet it would be cool.


semp

[Shuffler]

Definitely enjoying the read on where this thread is going.

[Busher]

Busher, I lost my medical in 2002. All I have now is memories. Well...and a nice six axis Level D simulator to play with.

Must be contagious. I didn't get to retire. They discovered a slightly enlarged Aorta when I was 59 (that hasn't changed in 12 years..LOL).

I used to really enjoy wrenching the twin Comanche with Dad when the annual came due. It saved some dollars but most of all, I learned a lot and had a lot of fun.

I am glad your Dad got to fly so long into his senior years.

[ACE]

Busher, I lost my medical in 2002. All I have now is memories. Well...and a nice six axis Level D simulator to play with.

The PT-19 is a Fairchild M62A to the FAA so it's not "experimental". Normal regs apply for inspection and maintenance. Just have to do an annual. It's a 1930s hardware store airplane; we used to joke that if you had a, screwdriver, pliers, a 1/2 " and 7/16" wrench you had almost a full tool set. Easy to work on. I pulled all the panels for the annual and helped out as "go-for' and I put all the panels back on. My annuals weren't that expensive. Just not all that much to check LOL!

It's about a 9.5 gallon/hour aircraft so back then I was ~$40-50 an hour on fuel and I just doubled that for maintenance reserve. The Ranger was designed to use oil as part of the cooling of the inline inverted 6, so it used about .8 quart per hour as well. They had a really amazing air inlet in the cowl that ran through baffles and exited between each cylinder with almost the same pressure from front to rear.

My Dad's PT-26 was in Canadian colors. Two old Canadian farmers that had trained in -26s decided to restore a pair of them and relive their youth. They did good jobs on both. They lost their tickets about a year after they finished and a ex-Marine F9 pilot imported one. He lost his vision/medical a year later, so we bought the -26. My Dad flew it about 10 years. it was a good airplane. Ended up getting imported back into Canada when Dad could no longer fly in his late 80s.

Just out of curiosity why would you design an engine to drink oil for lack of a better term? There has to be a reason.  Wouldn’t it be more efficient to just run it in a water loop through the Rad or use more air through the nose? 

[Toad]

Temco produced 8F's with flaps along with the Globe Swift.

Globe Swifts are awesome. Love that one. Never got a ride though.

[Busher]

Just out of curiosity why would you design an engine to drink oil for lack of a better term? There has to be a reason.  Wouldn’t it be more efficient to just run it in a water loop through the Rad or use more air through the nose?

Ace the Ranger L440 was an air cooled inverted inline 6. Hence no radiator. It was a low compression, low revving (<2500) motor that used a pressurized oil system.
Technically it is not drinking oil... it's actually consuming the oil as it both lubricates and helps to cool the engine. Antiquated by today's standards but it worked.
The R2800 on the Convair 440 I flew in the late 60's used oil by the gallon per hour doing the same job.

[Toad]

Must be contagious. I didn't get to retire. They discovered a slightly enlarged Aorta when I was 59 (that hasn't changed in 12 years..LOL).

I used to really enjoy wrenching the twin Comanche with Dad when the annual came due. It saved some dollars but most of all, I learned a lot and had a lot of fun.

I am glad your Dad got to fly so long into his senior years.

Yeah...there's a lot of things the Docs are just guessing at.

Hangar time with your plane is always good times. Even just the wash/wax. Used to work on the PT and put on the White Cliffs of Dover CD, all WW2 music. I know the airplane enjoyed it.

Dad was a lucky man. Lived to be 95; got to take his grandchildren up in the aircraft he started his career in.

[Vraciu]

WHAT? Hideous?? Sacrilege! The PT-22 is svelte and sexy. Even the flying wires are coolness. I still like the looks of that aircraft.

So ugly even its mother didn’t love it.   I think they made it out of crashed Stearman and Peashooter parts. 

My dad had a PT-26 same time my brother and I had PT-19s. He lived in NE, so the canopy seriously extended his flying season. Nonetheless, I did not enjoy flying his as much. Too much canopy framing hindering my view. It buffeted you worse than the PT-19 when you slid back the canopy too. It was hot in the summer when closed. Usually just cracked it back the first notch to let a little air in and limit the buffeting.   Nah....-19s 4EVAR!

That’s some interesting stuff there.   Wow.  Wouldn’t be much fun to fly the -26 in South Texas then.

[Toad]

Technically it is not drinking oil... it's actually consuming the oil as it both lubricates and helps to cool the engine. Antiquated by today's standards but it worked.

Exactly so, Busher. For the time, it was a simple, cost effective and efficient technique.